SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
undocumented immigrants
In the Fight Against Trump and Vance for Free Speech and the Truth, Be Like Mary Lupien
Lupien's viral interruption of JD Vance's speech falsely blaming immigrants for the U.S. housing crisis wasn't just important because it corrected a falsehood; she was defending the fundamental right to challenge power.
Mar 14, 2025
What happens when free speech is only free for those in power? JD Vance and the Trump administration claim to champion the First Amendment, but in practice, their version of free speech comes with a condition: It protects those who uphold their agenda and punishes those who challenge it.
This was on full display at the National League of Cities conference when Vance, now vice president, blamed the housing crisis on undocumented immigrants. "You see a very consistent relationship between a massive increase in immigration and a massive increase in housing prices," Vance argued. According to him, the rising cost of housing wasn't due to corporate greed or predatory real estate practices, but to migrants. It was a textbook case of scapegoating—shifting blame onto the powerless to distract from the true culprits.
Enter Mary Lupien, a Rochester, New York city councilmember and mayoral candidate, who wasn't having it. In a moment of raw defiance, she interrupted Vance's speech, cutting through the lies with a simple truth:
Vance and his allies claim to be warriors for free expression, yet their administration is actively working to silence those who challenge their narrative.
"We're competing against corporations, not immigrants. Give us back our funding!"
It was a flash of courage in a political landscape where too many sit silently while bad-faith actors rewrite reality.
Lupien, a progressive leader and longtime advocate for social justice, has represented Rochester's East District on City Council since January 2020. A resident of the Beechwood neighborhood, she has built her career around economic justice, housing rights, and community empowerment. Even those who don't align with her politically cannot deny her commitment, bravery, and willingness to challenge power.
Her advocacy has consistently centered on issues of housing insecurity, systemic inequality, and corporate accountability. And while some might dismiss her tactics as disruptive, history favors those who refuse to stay silent in the face of injustice.
Scapegoating is one of the oldest tricks in the book. Governments throughout history have blamed the most vulnerable groups—immigrants, minorities, the poor—to divert attention from systemic failures. It's a strategy designed to stoke fear, deepen divisions, and deflect accountability.
Vance's rhetoric is a classic example. Instead of addressing the real causes of America's housing crisis—corporate landlords, speculative real estate, stagnant wages, and decades of underinvestment in affordable housing—he chose to point the finger at immigrants.
Lupien's response was a direct rejection of this deceitful narrative. She reminded the room, and the nation, that the real enemies of affordable housing are not desperate families seeking a better life but corporations and policies designed to prioritize profit over people.
JD Vance and the Trump administration love to talk about free speech—until it's used against them. Their version of free speech is selective: It defends those who reinforce their ideology while crushing those who dissent.
Look no further than the arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist and legal U.S. resident, who was detained by federal immigration officials after helping lead student protests at Columbia University against the war in Gaza. President Donald Trump called Khalil's apprehension the "first arrest of many" in his administration's crackdown on campus opposition. Though a federal judge has temporarily blocked his deportation, the message was clear: Speak out against power, and you will pay the price.
The hypocrisy is glaring. Vance and his allies claim to be warriors for free expression, yet their administration is actively working to silence those who challenge their narrative. Khalil's arrest wasn't about enforcing immigration laws—it was about punishing dissent.
This is what makes Lupien's defiance so important. She wasn't just correcting a falsehood; she was defending the fundamental right to challenge power. In an era where dissent is increasingly met with retaliation, her voice was an act of resistance.
George Orwell once wrote:
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."
Lupien exercised that right—not for personal gain, not for applause, but because someone had to.
There will be those who call Lupien's interruption disrespectful. There will be cynics who claim she was chasing a viral moment to boost her mayoral campaign. But both arguments ignore the stakes.
Trump's agenda isn't just about silencing opposition—it's about annihilating it. His administration has worked tirelessly to discredit institutions, suppress dissent, and consolidate power. Any act of civil disobedience that disrupts this effort—no matter how small—is an essential defense of democracy.
Moments like this come and go in the 24-hour news cycle. In a few days, most people will forget. But the slow erosion of democracy doesn't happen overnight—it happens in the moments when people choose to stay silent instead of speaking out.
Lupien made her choice. Will the rest of us?
Keep ReadingShow Less
At Sanctuary City Hearing, Boston Mayor Rebukes GOP's 'False Narrative' About Immigrants
"If you wanted to make us safe, pass gun reforms. Stop cutting Medicaid," said Mayor Michelle Wu. "Stop cutting funds for veterans."
Mar 05, 2025
At an all-day hearing on sanctuary cities held by the U.S. House Oversight Committee, Republican lawmakers were intent on vilifying the Democratic mayors of Chicago, Boston, and other cities and accusing them of allowing undocumented immigrants to run rampant by refusing to authorize local police forces to work with the federal government on immigration enforcement.
But the narrative of dangerous immigrants and crime-ridden Democratic-led cities did not sit well with the local leaders who voluntarily testified before the committee, and Democratic Boston Mayor Michelle Wu appeared to welcome the opportunity to set the record straight regarding immigration reform and the broader GOP agenda.
Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) accused Wu of acting unconstitutionally by setting immigration statutes in Boston that differ from federal policies under the Trump administration, which has launched a nationwide deportation operation led by border czar Thomas Homan and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
As a sanctuary city, Boston does not fully cooperate with ICE to arrest undocumented immigrants, but Wu noted in the hearing that under a local law called the Trust Act, authorities work with the agency "every single day on criminal matters and hold people who are committing crimes accountable."
When Gosar demanded to know whether Wu defers to local, state, or federal laws when there is a distinction in immigration-related policies, the mayor pointed out that local leaders are not required to follow federal law "in conflict with local laws or state laws."
"The federal government has jurisdiction and supremacy over all immigration laws," replied Gosar. "We're the ones that define that. We just heard, 'We want comprehensive immigration policy.' How can you get a comprehensive immigration policy when you're defying it from the get-go?"
Wu answered that Congress could pass "bipartisan legislation, and that would be comprehensive immigration law."
"The false narrative is that immigrants in general are criminals or immigrants in general cause all sorts of danger and harm. That is actually what is undermining safety in our communities," she said, adding that Republicans could end their efforts to cut Medicaid and health research, and pass broadly popular gun control legislation.
"That is what would make our city safe," said Wu.
Wu further suggested she won't be pressured into changing her city's immigration policies to match President Donald Trump's when she said Boston has not historically been governed by "the word of presidents, or kings, or presidents who think they are kings."
The mayor fiercely defended her record as the city's leader and spoke out against characterizations of Boston and other large cities as crime-ridden, noting that officials recorded the lowest number of homicides in Boston last year since at least 1957.
She called on Homan to testify on Capitol Hill after Ranking Member Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) pointed to the border czar's comments from last month about Boston. Without citing specifics, Homan accused Massachusetts authorities of allowing "multiple" violent criminals who were unauthorized to be in the U.S. to walk free from jails.
"Shame on him for lying about my city, for having the nerve to insult our police commissioner who has overseen the safest Boston has been in anyone's lifetime," said Wu.
In Boston, city councilors and advocacy groups led local residents in a rally supporting Wu and the city's immigrant community. Attendees held signs that read, "Stay the hell out of Boston, Homan" and chanted, "Say it loud, say it clear, immigrants are welcome here!"
From Washington, Wu sent home a message via social media: "To every one of my neighbors back in Boston, know this: You belong here. This is your home. Boston es tu hogar. Boston se lakay ou... This is our city. We are the safest major city in the nation because we are safe for everyone."
Keep ReadingShow Less
In the Struggle for Undocumented Liberation, US Citizenship Is Not the Answer
When we reject the state’s power to define who belongs, and instead build systems of care that honor all people’s right to exist and thrive, we move toward real justice.
Feb 28, 2025
I am one of the 11 million undocumented immigrants who refuse to live in the shadows of the United States. Now that President Donald Trump’s policies are violently escalating, it’s critical to understand that none of this is new. Family separations, concentration camps, and the displacement of people are part of a long history of ethnic cleansing disguised as immigration policy. U.S. citizens are only now seeing it for what it’s always been.
I once believed anti-immigrant sentiment stemmed from a misunderstanding or a lack of empathy. But over the last decade, I’ve begun to accept what I need other undocumented people and allies to understand: U.S. citizenship is not the answer. True liberation for undocumented people will never come from assimilating into a colonial system built on our oppression. Instead, we must center the fight for Indigenous sovereignty, recognizing that dismantling these colonial ways of existing in the world—not gaining U.S. citizenship—is the key to our collective liberation.
At its core, U.S. citizenship is a legal and political status that grants individuals rights and privileges in exchange for adhering to certain laws and being loyal to its institutions. While it’s often framed as a beacon of belonging, security, and inclusion, in practice citizenship has functioned as a tool of exclusion. Programs like Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), introduced by former President Barack Obama in 2012, highlight this tension, offering relief to some while reinforcing the “good immigrant” versus “bad immigrant” narrative.
Citizenship alone won’t free us—but solidarity will.
I was sitting in my high school English class when the program was first announced. What started as hope quickly devolved into disappointment when I realized I was ineligible due to when I arrived in the United States. To qualify, applicants must have arrived before age 16, lived in the U.S. continuously since 2007, and meet education or military service requirements. They must also pass background checks. These requirements underscore that only undocumented individuals who contribute to the U.S. economy through intellectual achievements or who advance the nation’s war machine are deemed worthy of living without the constant fear of deportation.
While DACA has shifted the material realities of some young undocumented people by providing work permits, it simultaneously puts them in danger. Recipients must voluntarily disclose their undocumented status to federal authorities, submitting fingerprints, addresses, and other personal information—a process that must be renewed every two years. Despite being billed as a relief program, DACA inadvertently creates a new system of surveillance targeting undocumented youth.
The disclosure of personal information not only risks recipients’ safety but also discourages resistance. With their standing in the U.S. contingent on being “productive” and “deserving,” DACA recipients are pressured to become complacent and silent about the broader criminalization of undocumented people. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has targeted undocumented activists from across the country in retaliation for their advocacy efforts. Thus, DACA is not merely a program meant to protect; it also functions as a system to surveil and neutralize a whole generation of young people.
At the same time Obama instituted the DACA program, his administration also militarized the border and expanded deportations. The actions of the so-called “Deporter-in-Chief” demonstrate that programs like DACA are insidiously compatible with anti-immigrant sentiment. By creating a distinction between so-called “good” and “bad” immigrants, citizenship divides our community and reinforces the narrative that our worth is conditional. We are reduced to exploitable and expendable resources, mere cogs in a capitalist system.
Moving forward, we must center the material realities of undocumented people who don’t have an immediate path toward legal citizenship on the horizon. As a short-term strategy, we must continue to support harm-reducing legislation such as the New Way Forward Act, which severs ties between the immigration and carceral systems. In the longer term, we must also attend to Land Back movements, acknowledging that Indigenous people are the rightful stewards of this land.
Citizenship alone won’t free us—but solidarity will. When we reject the state’s power to define who belongs, and instead build systems of care that honor all people’s right to exist and thrive, we move toward real justice. Our futures are intertwined, and only by dismantling these violent structures together can we create the world we all deserve.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular